I'm pretty sure you are talking about PlaceMaker:

http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=66184

I use the Weld option and it works well. Otherwise you can use soft erase, soft/smooth, or the CleanUp plugin. There's another plugin I use, but I can't think of the name right now.

What I mean is that I used a saw-tooth profile rather than threading on the control mesh.

In theory I could have used various modelling techniques on this and combined them, but SubD seemed like the best tool for coping with all the more difficult aspects at once.

I even tried doing this in Moi first - because I was under the impression that it was supposed to be easier to model this sought of thing. The basic form with the tubes and 50% of the bevelling worked a treat, but it crashed and burned when it came to some of the more complex bevelling (where the small tubes meet the base).

@hornoxx said:

this is a good model example Hieru thanks for sharing!
In addition to the model´s complexity itself I first assumed that you had managed to make a screw thread inside this cylinder

Thanks!

I'll put my hands up and admit that I cheated on the threading. It really wasn't necessary, so I just used a saw-tooth profile. I've done SubD threading before but didn't really have the time for this model.

@rich o brien said:

when then pipes meeting the surface are smaller than the parent it's tough to keep things cylindrical.

i wish there was a Spherize extension for SU like Blender has.

Yes, I had to rework things several times until I managed to maintain the cylindrical form.

And a here's a quick render.

Funny you should mention it Rich, but that's exactly what I had to deal with the other week.

The general opinion is that you have to increase the detail (segments) of your cylinders.

Bracket.skp

@syburn said:

How to save a model as a component that goes into its own file. So I can build up a library of furniture components.

Unless I'm missing something, it's Right Click > Save As...

That's how I save all my components when working within a project.

Just found afew minutes to look at your model properly Kaas. Really nice job.

I couldn't help putting on my Quad Police uniform and tackling a few unwanted tris (I lost a few loops in the process too).

I've highlighted the main areas that have been modified.

stackStove_cubi_test2.skp

Isn't that in the works Thomas?

I still use Artisan where SubD isn't appropriate, but like you I use it in conjunction with SubD. As well as the knife tool I use it to preview subdivision as I'm modelling - mostly because it won't triangulate areas I haven't finished quad modelling, but also because it can give a more detailed preview of the flow and detail of the subdivision.

Happy to help . I'll take a look at your model tomorrow, but from the looks of things your workflow is coming along nicely (certainly more advanced than when I was starting out).

One thing I will add is that sometimes the extra geometry is worth it e.g. for UV mapping or selling models in different formats.

On the topic of UV mapping, I suspect that my left-hand control mesh might be the better approach for mapping. Hopefully someone who knows more about UV unwrapping will be able to confirm or refute this.

@Kaas

Sometimes you can bend over backwards to keep loops to a minimum (see examples either side of central control meshes)...

...only to find that there isn't that much difference in the poly count:

In this instance you might even find that using RoundCorners is the most economic and efficient way to model this form.

Corner.skp

Thanks Thomas

Quick question.

What happens if you share a SubD model (without converting to plain mesh) and someone without SubD opens it? Do they just get the control mesh?

Glad you found it useful.

I'm still wracking my brain for a faster way of doing it, but an easy solution is evading me at this point.

So, because you can't get a perfect square or rectangle from this pattern I had to admit defeat using Skatter.

In the end I used a more manual workflow (helped with a few plugins):

1. Create 3 component versions of the tile pattern. Use one of them to create a large area of tiles.

2. Use Random Select at 30% and then use Component Replacer to replace the selection with one of the 3 components you started with. Repeat this several times using different components.

3. Create a plane for the finished tile area and use Zorro to slice up the components to create a straight edge.

4. Delete the unwanted geometry within the edge components. You can fix the holes in the geometry by selecting the edge components and using Fixit 101.

It sounds like a lot of work, but it should only take 20-30 minutes.

Unless I'm missing something using that grid means slicing through tiles, which isn't ideal for randomising.

If you model the entire section pictured, then create duplicates with varying textures, you can use Skatter with those.

I'm away from my computer right now, but I'll work up an example when I get back in the office.

Another option would be to use Skatter and a selection of components with different textures. That's my preferred approach.

You can use FloorGenerator with random textures also, but this creates a lot of unique groups/components.